The free rider problem is the most used argument against space habitation. I think this argument makes sense in the context of consumerism because the consumer does not care about the society. Let's look at this quote from the TED talk James H Kunstler dissects suburbia:
One final thing -- I've been very disturbed about this for years, but I think it's particularly important for this audience. Please, please, stop referring to yourselves as "consumers." OK? Consumers are different than citizens. Consumers do not have obligations, responsibilities and duties to their fellow human beings. And as long as you're using that word consumer in the public discussion, you will be degrading the quality of the discussion we're having. And we're gonna continue being clueless going into this very difficult future that we face.
To the consumer, the free rider is a problem because the consumer is focused on the net effect for individuals of a society. But the citizen is focused on the net effect for the society. Space habitation is great for society, but the benefits might take longer to come to some individuals then others.
I say consumerism blocks space habitation, as opposed to space development, because consumerism will drive the destructive economic exploitation of space. If we exploit space, as opposed to using it in a non-destructively, we will be repeating the same mistake that humanity has been committing since the dawn of time.
Reactions
-Can consumerism help space habitation?
Resources
Photo by roland
Kunstler, James H "James H Kunstler dissects suburbia" February 2004. Online video clip. TED. Accessed on August 11, 2009. < http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/james_howard_kunstler_dissects_suburbia.html >
In Case You Skimmed
- Consumers are not concerned about their neighbors
- So, they will not support space habitation since it may not directly benefit them
